Let’s say, for the sake of thought experimentation, that the current Quebec minority government decides to put the sovereignty idea on the back burner and get serious — and I mean, no-spit, nuts-and-bolts-level, boring-to-everyone-but-public-administrators serious — about governance. Could they make it work?
It’s no idle question. When you look at Matt Gurney’s critique of the Marois government in its early days, you’ll realize that this isn’t just a listing of policy steps that Mr. Gurney has issues with. It’s also the shopping list of a government with a “progressive” background, leading a population and society that’s more accepting of “progressive” ideas in the mainstream.
Think about it. Low university tuition (or even, some news stories suggest, free tuition). “Green”-informed and -influenced decision-making on economic exploitation, such as not pursuing shale gas opportunities. Searching for more opportunities to “tax the rich.” These are decisions that the Left, in other provinces, would certainly have approved of in the name of “preserving the community and its values” — that is, if the Left actually had a mandate to do so, unencumbered by a need to survive by accommodating the Right.
The thing about Quebec is that allegations of corruption have crippled the one political party perceived as being the voice of economic conservatism; it will take at least a year, more likely three or four as well as some generational change, before the PLQ can regain the trust of the electorate. And even though the PQ have a minority government, there are hundreds of decisions it can make on economic policy that don’t require legislative action.
So: a rare opportunity, not just for progressives in Quebec but for the Left in Canada, to prove a point and answer a question: in the absence of a “conservative” movement, can a genuinely progressive government in Canada succeed today?
The standard for success: re-election of the PQ as a continuing minority or a majority government. The standard for failure: loss of confidence followed by loss of power in an election. The same standard that, on a national level, Stephen Harper’s Tories were held to since 2006. Who here thinks the PQ can do it?
Pingback: The Great Quebec Experiment, Or: The Canadian Left’s Last Chance | The Wellington Street Post
Interesting thesis however unless the ROC cuts off the allowance the experiment is rigged. Unless “comparible levels of services” is strictly defined and costed Quebec will simply keep spending. If they raise taxes on “the rich and corporations” and the exodus begins then they will just cry for more money. It is a viscious circle and a bad joke being played.
Interesting to see the left’s fascination with renewable energy. Marois has only to look next door to see the folly of radical green energy policies. Under McGuinty, Ont is set to have some of the highest electrical rates in the industrialized world, all for no measurable environmental gain. Quebec is in much better shape than most jurisdictions because of investment in hydro power 30 years ago. Still since this is usually associated with Liberal governments, she probably wants to carve out a green policy for herself. Looks a lot like cutting off your nose to save the face.
Yes, McGuinty could have imported much more Quebec electricity and Ontario would be much better off, but he wanted to create ‘Ontario’ jobs (which turns out to be a joke).
Actually P.Q. governments have been honest and reasonably well run, but with the giving away of money to all the pressure groups and the bias against the private sector of course it is all for nought.
Without tax money from the rest of the country Quebec would collapse. The social structure they have could not be supported by their current economy.